Hi Darrell I've been browsing on the web to see if there is any connection of
Gricenchos's men to the "Old Men of Genesis Ten" Britain 2035 BC with regard to
their graves. Is there any record that Ciocal visited Britain in 2035 BC being a
caananite hunter gatherer group. I was also browsing the web and it mentioned
something about 100 years after the flood which was Peleg's day 2247 BC so
perhaps theywent from Britain 100 after the flood to be in Ireland by 2208 BC
with six boats I have found out plus fifty men and fifty women. Then they went
from Ireland to somewhere to return again to Ireland at the Battle of Magithe in
2025 BC so it seems likely that as dan suspects and so do i that these people
were a Neanderthal / Caananite group then they must have aged farely
considerably since 2208 BC. It seems very likely to me that the British
Neanderthal people group were none other than the old men and women of Genesis
ten although be it a caananite people group. What do you reckon Darrell? John

DJ to JXF

Yes Dan I'll do that for you and exactly what Darrell
has requested. I did send him a links page last night
from Oxford University Press with some carbon dates and
locations etc. John

n 10/16/07,
Dan Janzen

Excellent work Darrell... Right on target with
all the research I have done. John if you can
look up the information that Darrell requested
on northern Cromagnon and Neanderthal
settlements and chart their location then we can
try to identify which people groups (decendants
of Noah) that they are associated with.

Hi John and Dan,

Do not expect to hear from me much for a while, but thought I would drop a short
note or request.

1) Beware the 100 years mentioned by Keating - it appears to be a rounding off.
The 140 year figure seems more realistic for the discovery of Ireland.

"It is here that the Taking of
the Seven is told, that is, the taking which took place by Cichol Gricen-choss
in Inber Domnand: that is, fifty men and three times fifty women [was] the full
number of each fourth part of them, with Cichol mac Guil meic Gairb meic
Tuathaigh meic Gumoir from Sliab Emoir, and Loth Luamnach, his mother. Two
hundred years with them at fishing and at fowling, until Partholon came to them
and they fought the battle of Mag Itha, from which originates the name
'Seven-Taking'. And Cichol was slain there and so the Fomoraig were destroyed."

Always look for an original quote from ancient texts, many websites have real
problems.

3) I remember that one book I was reading mentioned that Ciocal's people had a
Phoenician connection. We do not have any direct evidence that I am aware of
that they were Neanderthal. However, it is fine to suggest that as a
speculative quess.

4) Request: John, recently I was viewing a video on early British History. (I
am studing Russian History right now). It mentioned the ancient sites in the
Orkney Island, and especially Skara Brae. That site fits the post flood
outposts nicely.

a) During the Ice Age, France, England and possibly Ireland were all connected
together. One theory suggests the artic circle was quite warm near the ocean,
but cold inland. Thus the early hunter gatherers would be either north, east,
or South of the Ice Pack.

b) Skara Brae is dated about 3200 BC. Based on the translations found between
Egyptian dates and Ussherian dates in my chronology, that would suggest it was
founded about 2000 BC give or take, but no earlier than 2200 BC. The web sites
call them Neolithic. It appears they had some 50 to 100 people in their group
and did a lot of fishing.

c) Modern arch... suggest they lived there for some 600 years until the climate
shifted and it became to cold. Michael O. suggests that the melt down caused
fresh water to freeze rapidly over the artic circle, shifting the climate
rapidly. My estimates suggests this happened about 1500 BC.

Thus, I am suggesting that the fomairi under Ciocal probably founded Skara
Brae. Enough information matches to make it a likely match.

d) After their defeat in 2025, the fomairi may have shifted more to farming.

John, please check to see what you can find out about any human remains.
If the remains are Neanderthal, then we would have a little evidence for your
suggested connection. They buried their dead in a pyramid shaped mound near the
village.

Can you find any other villages carbon dated around 3200 BC in the north lands?
Norway, North Russia, or Alaska? What information can you find on them?

Additionally, I think if we map out all the locations were Neanderthal and
Cro-Magon remains have been found, with carbon dates associated with them and
compare to the model of the Ice Age, we might have a much better chance of
making a case for such assertions.

Keep Researching

God Bless,

Darrell K. White

ps. A lot of contraversy still revolves around Chinese Chronology. Two major
record are close to each other, but do not exactly match. Different
interuptations give different dates. Most dates given are in the 2240, or so
range, but it is sufficient uncertain that I would not discredit a date after
the dispersion in 2191 BC either. However, I suspect it was colonized (with
Noah's involvment), before the dispersion. The 2256 date is HLH's date and
should not be trusted. I believe he forced this part of his chronology
incorrectly.

Subject: Genealogy of Ciocal Gricenchos

JXF to DW

Hi Darrell it's interesting that you put the birth of Ciocal
Gricenchos at 2275 BC making him 40 years old when he descovered Ireland (2235
BC exactly 200 years before Partholan) But then Partholan engaged Gricenchos
10years later at the Battle of Magithe being that Partholan found Ireland
uninhabitted. We also have Ardna making a descovery of Ireland 140 after
the flood (This is here where things get a little bit confused) but did'nt stay
and went back to Babylon. So it seems we are talking about two descoveries here
. one by Ciocal in 2235 BC and the other one later in 2208 BC. I would need
there fore if that is the case to make an emmendment to my combined industries
tables without having to alter the whole table if I paste the ammended part of
the table and call it "Another Alternative Historyor Genealogy then I can place
Ciocal under date of 2235 BC and Ardna (Nimrod?) in 2208 BC again 140 years
after the flood. Plus also the construction of Scara Brae at 2200 to 2000 BC.
What do you reckon? By the way many thanks for sharing this info with me and
sorry to get back to you so late; but I've been looking for the links pages Dan
sent me with regard to James's take on Atlantice and as Dan says I really need
to study it. Anyway many thanks for what you do forme Darrell. God Bless John

DW to JXF

John,

1) Ardna 2208 BC - of the family of Nimrod, not Nimrod, maybe not even a son.
2) Ciocal 2235 BC (200 years fishing before Patholan) - fishing where?, we do
not know where it was. a) maybe after 2208 BC before he fished in that area.
or b) He fished near Scotland and did not land on Irish soil, thus giving Ardna
that honor. Obviously, the survey team saw it by 2248 BC at least.
3) birthof Ciocal was just an estimate to show that he had to have born by at
least 2275 BC to be the leader by 2235 BC. If so, he had to be within the first
4 generations after the flood. which mean the genealogy given is probably a
mistake with someone else later on. But we should watch.

I would not change you table based on this information unless you desire to
assume Ciocal in scotland by about 2235 BC.

A REVISED HISTORY CIOCAL GRICENCHOS by JXF

To get the full picture of Ciocal Gricenchos we need to go right back to the
year 2250 BC when he was bourne. Niel his father returned to Ireland with
the last survey team by 2248 BC and the three devisions were made just one
year before the birth of Peleg. It is thus Niel that I am sugesting returned
to Ireland with the last survey team with six boats with fifty men and fifty
women. The Ice of the Ice age became visible in 2260 BC (Last World Survey)
and I am sugesting that before 2248 BC NO TECHNOLOGY was lost in the way of
metal tools and other technologies such as some of the megaliths. If Niel
the father of Ciocal Gricenchos knew about the fishing area he assigned to
his son ; then I would sugest that Niel whoever he might be ; also
hunted/fished and gathered in that area in 2248 BC. This type of industry
which HLH (Compendium of World History ) calls "Mesolithic" and says that
the "latest huntergatherers passed through Britain were thus I am sugesting
none other than Ciocal's father with his band of fifty men and fifty women
who infact returned to Ireland passed through it at this date which
according to my tables is about am 1757 and 2247 BC give or take a year ie
2248 BC and 1756 annomundi if we can call Ireland geographicly part of
Britain which I am sugesting is a fairly good and safe inferance and
deduction. Now although Geoffrey Keating has recorded a tradition that it
was Ciocal who arrived 100 after the flood and the story thus becomes a
little bit confused I am sugesting that Ciocal would have been too young to
be with the survey team therefore I am concluding and infuring that it was
Niel who returned to and passed through Ireland (Hunting and gathering as he
did so and Fishing) at this early time; so if Ciocal was bourne 2250 BC or
1754 am then he would at least have to be twenty five years old to make him
chieften and leader of the formori by the time he started his fishing /huntergathering
industry in North Scotland in this case the Orkneys 200 years before the
battle of Magithe with Patholan in 2025 BC , and the date I am sugesting
that Gricenchos started his fishing /gathering industry is therefore 2225 BC
(although in Ireland it would have been less when he passed through Ireland
in 2208 BC or just after) thus giving Ardena the honour of having been the
first todescover Ireland 140 years after the flood. So then with this
genealogy and the testimoney of the archaeological record od flint
impliments plus I might add the fishing line sinker found by the author
would testify to the truthfulness and genealogy of Ciocal Gricenchos's men
having been in the right area at the rifgt time. Also this genealogy gives
us two abouts dates which fit very nicely Namely 2225 BC for start of
Fishing /gathering industry in North Scotland in the Orkneys and the passing
by of Ireland either at or some time after 2208 BC whichis the date given in
my table (for Ciocal having seen but not descovering Ireland thus giving
Ardena that pleasure for having explored and descovered Ireland though
returning to Babylon sometime after the descovery and to which he never
returned leaving it to Ciocal Gricenchos to try and reclaim the fishing site
assigned him by his father "Niel" but instead found Partholan's coloney
already there and therefore engaged him in the battle of magithe in
annomundi 1979 and 2025 BC in which the men of Gricenchos sailed in six
boats or ships to Ireland with fity men and fifty women being the
accompiniment of each ship. I am also sugesting that after their defeat in
2025 they became farmers. Ciocal's men also built the village of Scara Brae
no earlier than 2200 to 2000 BC and these industries are called by websites
and archaeologists Neolithic although what I ame suggesting is a mixed
economy of farming and fisher/huntergathering. JohnHXF

POST-FLOOD NEPHILIM

Hi Darrell; did you get the link I sent you on Post Flood Nephilim? It seems
to me that the caananites carried through the genes of their predecessors before
the flood; now that we have evaluated Albion; Bergion Atlas Cichol Gricenchos
(All Sons of Niel alius Poseiden) if I'm being logical in conclusion to this
conjecture. John

Hi Darrell; in what date BC did Gaeldel's son Hymec Scot claim Scotland and
Ireland? If so it must have been Hymec Scot who brought the Bronze industry to
Scotland and Ireland as well if my Bronze industry date on the industries table
for Britain and Ireland which you recomended is valied of 1480/1421 BC would
fall with in the exodus time frame. Thus if 1480 is considered "Early
Bronze " with regard to Britain and Ireland then perhaps even the
firbolgues whoe's date you mentioned of 1354 to 1324 BC for eb1 would still fall
with in this time frame. Given the genealogy spread sheet table that you very
kindly sent me ( And for which I am most greatfull) I will evidently need to
make some emmendments to my table with additional information from your
spreadsheet table an then pin the additional information to the already existing
industries table without having to alter any of the dates. But to show the
additional information as an "Alternative History Table" pinned to the
old table for the sake of interest. The original date you gave me for the
firbolgue colony was about 1289 BC. If as you say Darrell Ireland was'nt
occupied untill the firbolgue 1354/1324 BC Time Framethen the nemeds must ownly
have ruled untill 1490 BC if Ireland was under "High Water" from the
end of the ice age ca1491 BC, Thus the same is true of Hu Gadarn 1421/1365 BC
time frame whom I am sugesting brought the Bronze Industry to Southern England
and from the evidense found at stone henge of Egyptian faiance beeds and the
"Mycenain " Bronze Dagger not ownly confirms your Genealogy
"Spread sheet" going right the way back to Adam in 4004 BC but also
proves the validation for the Bronze Industries in both Britain and Ireland from
the Exodus. Thus either way the Bronze industry I sugest was given to Hymec Scot
to take to Scotland and Ireland from Spain also given the bronze finds at stone
henge and I might add flint arrow heads as well in addition. Should I use 1354
BC as the additional information date for the Bronze industry on Ireland or
should I go with the Hyec Scot date? John

In regard to the Genealogy.,
AL to AN 108 to 145 in the spreadsheet is the Irish lineage of Miles given
in four different source.
Since the names varied slightly from one source to another we can see that they
are indepentant
verifications that the list is valid. Different nationalities wrote the
names with slightly different sounds -
but it is clear that they are speaking of the same people.

While I was researching your question, I found a reference to Rawlingson's study
of Irish Genealogy.
It is now my fourth independent verification of this lineage and match what I
had very nicely.
Rawlingson is an historian from the mid 1800's and I often refer to his work.

In regard to Scota and Gaeldel,

It is mentioned in one source that Gaeldel's son (usually called) Iber or Eber
or Hyber or Hymec Scot
explored and claimed Ireland and ?? Scotland.

Lot daughter of Neir from the land of Sliab
Emoir (Mount Hermon) was a Formorian chieftain ... When her son Cichol led an
attack against Partholon and his followers on their settlement in Ireland, ...

It seems this source suggest Cichol is the son of Goll, but definitely from
Canaan region and a Formorian. I think Poseidon is
more likely, but?

But in searching the web, I found no matches for Niel and Cichol except those at
your site. Maybe this is a confusion.

Adhna of the family of Nin was the first to discover Ireland by taking a soil
sample back. But Cichol is not related to Adhna
as far as I can tell. I assumed the the family of Nin meant Ninus or
Nimrod.

2) I am fairly confident on the confusion between Gaeldel and Miles and
Scota 1 and Scota 2 now and will address another email on that.

Hi Darrell that's extremely helpfull and indeed most
interesting about the phew eb1 implements form Eber Scot's exploration and yes
the 1354 dating that you sugest for the firbolgues (Sons of Dela according to
MG) is a remarkable and indeed most interesting correrlation of what he once
said to me in an email many months back.
What in particular I find of particular interest is the fact that the firbolgues
as you say also went to Southern England and thus found it occupied by Hu G's
men. and there is a tradition that Hu G's men did'nt have the Bronze technology
according to Cambrian Journal; (Here comes the interesting bit). Now if
Stonehenge was built say in 1365 BC. (And indeed I am also sugesting that the
firbolgues might have reached Southern England by 1365 BC before reaching
Ireland in 1354) then I am conjecturing in conclusion that Hu G's men would have
had something with which to trade for Bronze weopens and implements &c hence
the Bronze Mycenian dagger found at Stonehenge by archaeologists which they also
date to the mid 1300's BC which I am sugesting would make a perfect fit for a
stonehenge date of 1365 BC; but I do think and believe that Hu G's men had at
least a copper technology of soughts or at least some form of metal working
otherwise they would not be able to use the Plough. The Battle which the
Nemedians fought with the later Formorians I sugest must have been some time
between 1736 and 1500 BC (Say 1491 BC) . John

After I wrote the last email, it occurred to me that you might miss my point.

If it was stated that Iber Scot had brought a colony to Ireland, then that would
be an occupation, but all that was said was
that he explored and claimed Ireland for his Tribe. A claim which would
not be fulfilled until Miles' sons move there some
400 years latter. Although some eb1 impliments may have been left behind
during his exploration, I doubt it would be enough
to mark a transition (enough to be found consistently). I would
suggest looking to the firbolgues for eb1 (as you suggest below).

Another speculation of interest. If Iber Scot explored and claimed these
territories, one might assume that Ireland
and possible scotland were wasteland during this time. One of the 8
original sources has the Nemeds occupy until about
1500 BC and then says that Ireland lay a wasteland until the firbolgues.

This report would fit well with a rapid Ice Age melt down which destroys most
all the habitations were the great Ice shelf was
and leaves Great Britain a waste land separted from Europe. After a bit,
Hu G would occupy southern England, latter the firbolgues,
a different group, would find southern England occupied and travel further to
colonize Ireland.

Hi Darrell; in what date BC did Gaeldel's son Hymec Scot claim Scotland and
Ireland? If so it must have been Hymec Scot who brought the Bronze industry to
Scotland and Ireland as well if my Bronze industry date on the industries table
for Britain and Ireland which you recomended is valied of 1480/1421 BC would
fall with in the exodus time frame. Thus if 1480 is considered "Early
Bronze " with regard to Britain and Ireland then perhaps even the
firbolgues whoe's date you mentioned of 1354 to 1324 BC for eb1 would still fall
with in this time frame. Given the genealogy spread sheet table that you very
kindly sent me ( And for which I am most greatfull) I will evidently need to
make some emmendments to my table with additional information from your
spreadsheet table an then pin the additional information to the already existing
industries table without having to alter any of the dates. But to show the
additional information as an "Alternative History Table" pinned to the
old table for the sake of interest. The original date you gave me for the
firbolgue colony was about 1289 BC. If as you say Darrell Ireland was'nt
occupied untill the firbolgue 1354/1324 BC Time Framethen the nemeds must ownly
have ruled untill 1490 BC if Ireland was under "High Water" from the
end of the ice age ca1491 BC, Thus the same is true of Hu Gadarn 1421/1365 BC
time frame whom I am sugesting brought the Bronze Industry to Southern England
and from the evidense found at stone henge of Egyptian faiance beeds and the
"Mycenain " Bronze Dagger not ownly confirms your Genealogy
"Spread sheet" going right the way back to Adam in 4004 BC but also
proves the validation for the Bronze Industries in both Britain and Ireland from
the Exodus. Thus either way the Bronze industry I sugest was given to Hymec Scot
to take to Scotland and Ireland from Spain also given the bronze finds at stone
henge and I might add flint arrow heads as well in addition. Should I use 1354
BC as the additional information date for the Bronze industry on Ireland or
should I go with the Hyec Scot date? John

In regard to the Genealogy.,
AL to AN 108 to 145 in the spreadsheet is the Irish lineage of Miles given
in four different source.
Since the names varied slightly from one source to another we can see that they
are indepentant
verifications that the list is valid. Different nationalities wrote the
names with slightly different sounds -
but it is clear that they are speaking of the same people.

While I was researching your question, I found a reference to Rawlingson's study
of Irish Genealogy.
It is now my fourth independent verification of this lineage and match what I
had very nicely.
Rawlingson is an historian from the mid 1800's and I often refer to his work.

In regard to Scota and Gaeldel,

It is mentioned in one source that Gaeldel's son (usually called) Iber or Eber
or Hyber or Hymec Scot
explored and claimed Ireland and ?? Scotland.

Lot daughter of Neir from the land of Sliab
Emoir (Mount Hermon) was a Formorian chieftain ... When her son Cichol led an
attack against Partholon and his followers on their settlement in Ireland, ...

It seems this source suggest Cichol is the son of Goll, but definitely from
Canaan region and a Formorian. I think Poseidon is
more likely, but?

But in searching the web, I found no matches for Niel and Cichol except those at
your site. Maybe this is a confusion.

Adhna of the family of Nin was the first to discover Ireland by taking a soil
sample back. But Cichol is not related to Adhna
as far as I can tell. I assumed the the family of Nin meant Ninus or
Nimrod.

2) I am fairly confident on the confusion between Gaeldel and Miles and
Scota 1 and Scota 2 now and will address another email on that.

Hi Darrell that's extremely helpfull and indeed most
interesting about the phew eb1 implements form Eber Scot's exploration and yes
the 1354 dating that you sugest for the firbolgues (Sons of Dela according to
MG) is a remarkable and indeed most interesting correrlation of what he once
said to me in an email many months back.
What in particular I find of particular interest is the fact that the firbolgues
as you say also went to Southern England and thus found it occupied by Hu G's
men. and there is a tradition that Hu G's men did'nt have the Bronze technology
according to Cambrian Journal; (Here comes the interesting bit). Now if
Stonehenge was built say in 1365 BC. (And indeed I am also sugesting that the
firbolgues might have reached Southern England by 1365 BC before reaching
Ireland in 1354) then I am conjecturing in conclusion that Hu G's men would have
had something with which to trade for Bronze weopens and implements &c hence
the Bronze Mycenian dagger found at Stonehenge by archaeologists which they also
date to the mid 1300's BC which I am sugesting would make a perfect fit for a
stonehenge date of 1365 BC; but I do think and believe that Hu G's men had at
least a copper technology of soughts or at least some form of metal working
otherwise they would not be able to use the Plough. The Battle which the
Nemedians fought with the later Formorians I sugest must have been some time
between 1736 and 1500 BC (Say 1491 BC) . John

After I wrote the last email, it occurred to me that you might miss my point.

If it was stated that Iber Scot had brought a colony to Ireland, then that would
be an occupation, but all that was said was
that he explored and claimed Ireland for his Tribe. A claim which would
not be fulfilled until Miles' sons move there some
400 years latter. Although some eb1 impliments may have been left behind
during his exploration, I doubt it would be enough
to mark a transition (enough to be found consistently). I would
suggest looking to the firbolgues for eb1 (as you suggest below).

Another speculation of interest. If Iber Scot explored and claimed these
territories, one might assume that Ireland
and possible scotland were wasteland during this time. One of the 8
original sources has the Nemeds occupy until about
1500 BC and then says that Ireland lay a wasteland until the firbolgues.

This report would fit well with a rapid Ice Age melt down which destroys most
all the habitations were the great Ice shelf was
and leaves Great Britain a waste land separted from Europe. After a bit,
Hu G would occupy southern England, latter the firbolgues,
a different group, would find southern England occupied and travel further to
colonize Ireland.

Hi Darrell; in what date BC did Gaeldel's son Hymec Scot claim Scotland and
Ireland? If so it must have been Hymec Scot who brought the Bronze industry to
Scotland and Ireland as well if my Bronze industry date on the industries table
for Britain and Ireland which you recomended is valied of 1480/1421 BC would
fall with in the exodus time frame. Thus if 1480 is considered "Early
Bronze " with regard to Britain and Ireland then perhaps even the
firbolgues whoe's date you mentioned of 1354 to 1324 BC for eb1 would still fall
with in this time frame. Given the genealogy spread sheet table that you very
kindly sent me ( And for which I am most greatfull) I will evidently need to
make some emmendments to my table with additional information from your
spreadsheet table an then pin the additional information to the already existing
industries table without having to alter any of the dates. But to show the
additional information as an "Alternative History Table" pinned to the
old table for the sake of interest. The original date you gave me for the
firbolgue colony was about 1289 BC. If as you say Darrell Ireland was'nt
occupied untill the firbolgue 1354/1324 BC Time Framethen the nemeds must ownly
have ruled untill 1490 BC if Ireland was under "High Water" from the
end of the ice age ca1491 BC, Thus the same is true of Hu Gadarn 1421/1365 BC
time frame whom I am sugesting brought the Bronze Industry to Southern England
and from the evidense found at stone henge of Egyptian faiance beeds and the
"Mycenain " Bronze Dagger not ownly confirms your Genealogy
"Spread sheet" going right the way back to Adam in 4004 BC but also
proves the validation for the Bronze Industries in both Britain and Ireland from
the Exodus. Thus either way the Bronze industry I sugest was given to Hymec Scot
to take to Scotland and Ireland from Spain also given the bronze finds at stone
henge and I might add flint arrow heads as well in addition. Should I use 1354
BC as the additional information date for the Bronze industry on Ireland or
should I go with the Hyec Scot date? John

In regard to the Genealogy.,
AL to AN 108 to 145 in the spreadsheet is the Irish lineage of Miles given
in four different source.
Since the names varied slightly from one source to another we can see that they
are indepentant
verifications that the list is valid. Different nationalities wrote the
names with slightly different sounds -
but it is clear that they are speaking of the same people.

While I was researching your question, I found a reference to Rawlingson's study
of Irish Genealogy.
It is now my fourth independent verification of this lineage and match what I
had very nicely.
Rawlingson is an historian from the mid 1800's and I often refer to his work.

In regard to Scota and Gaeldel,

It is mentioned in one source that Gaeldel's son (usually called) Iber or Eber
or Hyber or Hymec Scot
explored and claimed Ireland and ?? Scotland.

Darrell

Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 18:48:16 +0100

From:

Subject: Re: Post Flood Nephilim=Neanderthal/Caananite

Hi Darrell many thanks for your genealogy spreadsheet and the info on the two
scotta's. I guess I was jumping the gun on Niel as an alius for Poseiden but
I''ll recheck my sources. John

On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:19 PM, Darrell White wrote:

John,

Sorry for hitting send at the wrong time.

1) I question Cichol Grincenchos as the son of Niel. I also question
Niel as an alias for Poseiden.

It seems that a case can be made for Cichol as a son of Poseiden. But I
think Niel is a mix up.
Please verify your source and cut and paste any identification.

Lot daughter of Neir from the land of Sliab
Emoir (Mount Hermon) was a Formorian chieftain ... When her son Cichol led an
attack against Partholon and his followers on their settlement in Ireland, ...

It seems this source suggest Cichol is the son of Goll, but definitely from
Canaan region and a Formorian. I think Poseidon is
more likely, but?

But in searching the web, I found no matches for Niel and Cichol except those at
your site. Maybe this is a confusion.

Adhna of the family of Nin was the first to discover Ireland by taking a soil
sample back. But Cichol is not related to Adhna
as far as I can tell. I assumed the the family of Nin meant Ninus or
Nimrod.

2) I am fairly confident on the confusion between Gaeldel and Miles and
Scota 1 and Scota 2 now and will address another email on that.

Darrell

On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 11:26 PM, john hext-fremlin

On 7/7/08, john hext-fremlin

Hi Darrell that's extremely helpfull and indeed most
interesting about the phew eb1 implements form Eber Scot's exploration and yes
the 1354 dating that you sugest for the firbolgues (Sons of Dela according to
MG) is a remarkable and indeed most interesting correrlation of what he once
said to me in an email many months back.
What in particular I find of particular interest is the fact that the firbolgues
as you say also went to Southern England and thus found it occupied by Hu G's
men. and there is a tradition that Hu G's men did'nt have the Bronze technology
according to Cambrian Journal; (Here comes the interesting bit). Now if
Stonehenge was built say in 1365 BC. (And indeed I am also sugesting that the
firbolgues might have reached Southern England by 1365 BC before reaching
Ireland in 1354) then I am conjecturing in conclusion that Hu G's men would have
had something with which to trade for Bronze weopens and implements &c hence
the Bronze Mycenian dagger found at Stonehenge by archaeologists which they also
date to the mid 1300's BC which I am sugesting would make a perfect fit for a
stonehenge date of 1365 BC; but I do think and believe that Hu G's men had at
least a copper technology of soughts or at least some form of metal working
otherwise they would not be able to use the Plough. The Battle which the
Nemedians fought with the later Formorians I sugest must have been some time
between 1736 and 1500 BC (Say 1491 BC) . John

On 7/7/08, Darrell White
wrote:

John,

After I wrote the last email, it occurred to me that you might miss my point.

If it was stated that Iber Scot had brought a colony to Ireland, then that would
be an occupation, but all that was said was
that he explored and claimed Ireland for his Tribe. A claim which would
not be fulfilled until Miles' sons move there some
400 years latter. Although some eb1 impliments may have been left behind
during his exploration, I doubt it would be enough
to mark a transition (enough to be found consistently). I would
suggest looking to the firbolgues for eb1 (as you suggest below).

Another speculation of interest. If Iber Scot explored and claimed these
territories, one might assume that Ireland
and possible scotland were wasteland during this time. One of the 8
original sources has the Nemeds occupy until about
1500 BC and then says that Ireland lay a wasteland until the firbolgues.

This report would fit well with a rapid Ice Age melt down which destroys most
all the habitations were the great Ice shelf was
and leaves Great Britain a waste land separted from Europe. After a bit,
Hu G would occupy southern England, latter the firbolgues,
a different group, would find southern England occupied and travel further to
colonize Ireland.

Darrell

Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 22:55:06 +0100

Subject: Re: Post Flood Nephilim=Neanderthal/Caananite

Hi Darrell; in what date BC did Gaeldel's son Hymec Scot claim Scotland and
Ireland? If so it must have been Hymec Scot who brought the Bronze industry to
Scotland and Ireland as well if my Bronze industry date on the industries table
for Britain and Ireland which you recomended is valied of 1480/1421 BC would
fall with in the exodus time frame. Thus if 1480 is considered "Early
Bronze " with regard to Britain and Ireland then perhaps even the
firbolgues whoe's date you mentioned of 1354 to 1324 BC for eb1 would still fall
with in this time frame. Given the genealogy spread sheet table that you very
kindly sent me ( And for which I am most greatfull) I will evidently need to
make some emmendments to my table with additional information from your
spreadsheet table an then pin the additional information to the already existing
industries table without having to alter any of the dates. But to show the
additional information as an "Alternative History Table" pinned to the
old table for the sake of interest. The original date you gave me for the
firbolgue colony was about 1289 BC. If as you say Darrell Ireland was'nt
occupied untill the firbolgue 1354/1324 BC Time Framethen the nemeds must ownly
have ruled untill 1490 BC if Ireland was under "High Water" from the
end of the ice age ca1491 BC, Thus the same is true of Hu Gadarn 1421/1365 BC
time frame whom I am sugesting brought the Bronze Industry to Southern England
and from the evidense found at stone henge of Egyptian faiance beeds and the
"Mycenain " Bronze Dagger not ownly confirms your Genealogy
"Spread sheet" going right the way back to Adam in 4004 BC but also
proves the validation for the Bronze Industries in both Britain and Ireland from
the Exodus. Thus either way the Bronze industry I sugest was given to Hymec Scot
to take to Scotland and Ireland from Spain also given the bronze finds at stone
henge and I might add flint arrow heads as well in addition. Should I use 1354
BC as the additional information date for the Bronze industry on Ireland or
should I go with the Hyec Scot date? John

On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Darrell White wrote:

John,

In regard to the Genealogy.,
AL to AN 108 to 145 in the spreadsheet is the Irish lineage of Miles given
in four different source.
Since the names varied slightly from one source to another we can see that they
are indepentant
verifications that the list is valid. Different nationalities wrote the
names with slightly different sounds -
but it is clear that they are speaking of the same people.

While I was researching your question, I found a reference to Rawlingson's study
of Irish Genealogy.
It is now my fourth independent verification of this lineage and match what I
had very nicely.
Rawlingson is an historian from the mid 1800's and I often refer to his work.

In regard to Scota and Gaeldel,

It is mentioned in one source that Gaeldel's son (usually called) Iber or Eber
or Hyber or Hymec Scot
explored and claimed Ireland and ?? Scotland.

Darrell

Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 18:48:16 +0100

Subject: Re: Post Flood Nephilim=Neanderthal/Caananite

Hi Darrell many thanks for your genealogy spreadsheet and the info on the two
scotta's. I guess I was jumping the gun on Niel as an alius for Poseiden but
I''ll recheck my sources. John

On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:19 PM, Darrell White wrote:

John,

Sorry for hitting send at the wrong time.

1) I question Cichol Grincenchos as the son of Niel. I also question
Niel as an alias for Poseiden.

It seems that a case can be made for Cichol as a son of Poseiden. But I
think Niel is a mix up.
Please verify your source and cut and paste any identification.

Lot daughter of Neir from the land of Sliab
Emoir (Mount Hermon) was a Formorian chieftain ... When her son Cichol led an
attack against Partholon and his followers on their settlement in Ireland, ...

It seems this source suggest Cichol is the son of Goll, but definitely from
Canaan region and a Formorian. I think Poseidon is
more likely, but?

But in searching the web, I found no matches for Niel and Cichol except those at
your site. Maybe this is a confusion.

Adhna of the family of Nin was the first to discover Ireland by taking a soil
sample back. But Cichol is not related to Adhna
as far as I can tell. I assumed the the family of Nin meant Ninus or
Nimrod.

2) I am fairly confident on the confusion between Gaeldel and Miles and
Scota 1 and Scota 2 now and will address another email on that.

Darrell

DW TO JXF

After I wrote the last email, it occurred to me that you
might miss my point.

If it was stated that Iber Scot had brought a colony to Ireland, then that would
be an occupation, but all that was said was
that he explored and claimed Ireland for his Tribe. A claim which would
not be fulfilled until Miles' sons move there some
400 years latter. Although some eb1 impliments may have been left behind
during his exploration, I doubt it would be enough
to mark a transition (enough to be found consistently). I would
suggest looking to the firbolgues for eb1 (as you suggest below).

Another speculation of interest. If Iber Scot explored and claimed these
territories, one might assume that Ireland
and possible scotland were wasteland during this time. One of the 8
original sources has the Nemeds occupy until about
1500 BC and then says that Ireland lay a wasteland until the firbolgues.

This report would fit well with a rapid Ice Age melt down which destroys most
all the habitations were the great Ice shelf was
and leaves Great Britain a waste land separted from Europe. After a bit,
Hu G would occupy southern England, latter the firbolgues,
a different group, would find southern England occupied and travel further to
colonize Ireland.

Darrell

JXF TO DW

Hi Darrell that's extremely helpfull and indeed most
interesting about the phew eb1 implements form Eber Scot's exploration and yes
the 1354 dating that you sugest for the firbolgues (Sons of Dela according to
MG) is a remarkable and indeed most interesting correrlation of what he once
said to me in an email many months back.
What in particular I find of particular interest is the fact that the firbolgues
as you say also went to Southern England and thus found it occupied by Hu G's
men. and there is a tradition that Hu G's men did'nt have the Bronze technology
according to Cambrian Journal; (Here comes the interesting bit). Now if
Stonehenge was built say in 1365 BC. (And indeed I am also sugesting that the
firbolgues might have reached Southern England by 1365 BC before reaching
Ireland in 1354) then I am conjecturing in conclusion that Hu G's men would have
had something with which to trade for Bronze weopens and implements &c hence
the Bronze Mycenian dagger found at Stonehenge by archaeologists which they also
date to the mid 1300's BC which I am sugesting would make a perfect fit for a
stonehenge date of 1365 BC; but I do think and believe that Hu G's men had at
least a copper technology of soughts or at least some form of metal working
otherwise they would not be able to use the Plough. The Battle which the
Nemedians fought with the later Formorians I sugest must have been some time
between 1736 and 1500 BC (Say 1491 BC) . John

Post-flood Nephilim
ancestors of Parthelon

Subject: Re: Post Flood Nephilim=Neanderthal/Caananite

Hi Darrell many thanks for your genealogy spreadsheet and the info on the two
scotta's. I guess I was jumping the gun on Niel as an alius for Poseiden but
I''ll recheck my sources. John

On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:19 PM, Darrell White wrote:

John,

Sorry for hitting send at the wrong time.

1) I question Cichol Grincenchos as the son of Niel. I also question
Niel as an alias for Poseiden.

It seems that a case can be made for Cichol as a son of Poseiden. But I
think Niel is a mix up.
Please verify your source and cut and paste any identification.

Lot daughter of Neir from the land of Sliab
Emoir (Mount Hermon) was a Formorian chieftain ... When her son Cichol led an
attack against Partholon and his followers on their settlement in Ireland, ...

It seems this source suggest Cichol is the son of Goll, but definitely from
Canaan region and a Formorian. I think Poseidon is
more likely, but?

But in searching the web, I found no matches for Niel and Cichol except those at
your site. Maybe this is a confusion.

JXF to DW
Subject: Post Flood Nephilim=Neanderthal/Caananite

Hi Darrell; did you get the link I sent you on Post Flood
Nephilim? It seems to me that the caananites carried through the genes of their
predecessors before the flood; now that we have evaluated Albion; Bergion Atlas
Cichol Gricenchos (All Sons of Niel alius Poseiden) if I'm being logical in
conclusion to this conjecture. John
Adhna of the family of Nin was the first to discover Ireland by taking a soil
sample back. But Cichol is not related to Adhna
as far as I can tell. I assumed the the family of Nin meant Ninus or
Nimrod.

2) I am fairly confident on the confusion between Gaeldel and Miles and
Scota 1 and Scota 2 now and will address another email on that.

Darrell

On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Darrell White wrote:

John,

In regard to the Genealogy.,
AL to AN 108 to 145 in the spreadsheet is the Irish lineage of Miles given
in four different source.
Since the names varied slightly from one source to another we can see that they
are indepentant
verifications that the list is valid. Different nationalities wrote the
names with slightly different sounds -
but it is clear that they are speaking of the same people.

While I was researching your question, I found a reference to Rawlingson's study
of Irish Genealogy.
It is now my fourth independent verification of this lineage and match what I
had very nicely.
Rawlingson is an historian from the mid 1800's and I often refer to his work.

In regard to Scota and Gaeldel,

It is mentioned in one source that Gaeldel's son (usually called) Iber or Eber
or Hyber or Hymec Scot
explored and claimed Ireland and ?? Scotland.

Hi Darrell; in what date BC did Gaeldel's son Hymec Scot claim Scotland and
Ireland? If so it must have been Hymec Scot who brought the Bronze industry to
Scotland and Ireland as well if my Bronze industry date on the industries table
for Britain and Ireland which you recomended is valied of 1480/1421 BC would
fall with in the exodus time frame. Thus if 1480 is considered "Early
Bronze " with regard to Britain and Ireland then perhaps even the
firbolgues whoe's date you mentioned of 1354 to 1324 BC for eb1 would still fall
with in this time frame. Given the genealogy spread sheet table that you very
kindly sent me ( And for which I am most greatfull) I will evidently need to
make some emmendments to my table with additional information from your
spreadsheet table an then pin the additional information to the already existing
industries table without having to alter any of the dates. But to show the
additional information as an "Alternative History Table" pinned to the
old table for the sake of interest. The original date you gave me for the
firbolgue colony was about 1289 BC. If as you say Darrell Ireland was'nt
occupied untill the firbolgue 1354/1324 BC Time Framethen the nemeds must ownly
have ruled untill 1490 BC if Ireland was under "High Water" from the
end of the ice age ca1491 BC, Thus the same is true of Hu Gadarn 1421/1365 BC
time frame whom I am sugesting brought the Bronze Industry to Southern England
and from the evidense found at stone henge of Egyptian faiance beeds and the
"Mycenain " Bronze Dagger not ownly confirms your Genealogy
"Spread sheet" going right the way back to Adam in 4004 BC but also
proves the validation for the Bronze Industries in both Britain and Ireland from
the Exodus. Thus either way the Bronze industry I sugest was given to Hymec Scot
to take to Scotland and Ireland from Spain also given the bronze finds at stone
henge and I might add flint arrow heads as well in addition. Should I use 1354
BC as the additional information date for the Bronze industry on Ireland or
should I go with the Hyec Scot date? John

On 7/7/08, Darrell White
wrote:

John,

After I wrote the last email, it occurred to me that you might miss my point.

If it was stated that Iber Scot had brought a colony to Ireland, then that would
be an occupation, but all that was said was
that he explored and claimed Ireland for his Tribe. A claim which would
not be fulfilled until Miles' sons move there some
400 years latter. Although some eb1 impliments may have been left behind
during his exploration, I doubt it would be enough
to mark a transition (enough to be found consistently). I would
suggest looking to the firbolgues for eb1 (as you suggest below).

Another speculation of interest. If Iber Scot explored and claimed these
territories, one might assume that Ireland
and possible scotland were wasteland during this time. One of the 8
original sources has the Nemeds occupy until about
1500 BC and then says that Ireland lay a wasteland until the firbolgues.

This report would fit well with a rapid Ice Age melt down which destroys most
all the habitations were the great Ice shelf was
and leaves Great Britain a waste land separted from Europe. After a bit,
Hu G would occupy southern England, latter the firbolgues,
a different group, would find southern England occupied and travel further to
colonize Ireland.

Darrell

On 7/7/08, john hext-fremlin
wrote:

Hi Darrell that's extremely helpfull and indeed most
interesting about the phew eb1 implements form Eber Scot's exploration and yes
the 1354 dating that you sugest for the firbolgues (Sons of Dela according to
MG) is a remarkable and indeed most interesting correrlation of what he once
said to me in an email many months back.
What in particular I find of particular interest is the fact that the firbolgues
as you say also went to Southern England and thus found it occupied by Hu G's
men. and there is a tradition that Hu G's men did'nt have the Bronze technology
according to Cambrian Journal; (Here comes the interesting bit). Now if
Stonehenge was built say in 1365 BC. (And indeed I am also sugesting that the
firbolgues might have reached Southern England by 1365 BC before reaching
Ireland in 1354) then I am conjecturing in conclusion that Hu G's men would have
had something with which to trade for Bronze weopens and implements &c hence
the Bronze Mycenian dagger found at Stonehenge by archaeologists which they also
date to the mid 1300's BC which I am sugesting would make a perfect fit for a
stonehenge date of 1365 BC; but I do think and believe that Hu G's men had at
least a copper technology of soughts or at least some form of metal working
otherwise they would not be able to use the Plough. The Battle which the
Nemedians fought with the later Formorians I suggest must have been some time
between 1736 and 1500 BC (Say 1491 BC) . John

Dear Bill here's down below what I have found out about
Scotta from Darrell; Thus one can see at a glance how easy it is to get confused
with the idea of colonization and exploration which are two entirely diffrent
things. Thus I'm also sugesting that Hu G's men probably picked up the Bronze
industry from the firbolgues when they found England occupied in 1365 BC. John

-
Hide quoted text -

Genealogy of
Ciocal Gricenchos

Hi Darrell it's interesting that you put the birth of Ciocal
Gricenchos at 2275 BC making him 40 years old when he descovered Ireland (2235
BC exactly 200 years before Partholan) But then Partholan engaged Gricenchos
10years later at the Battle of Magithe being that Partholan found Ireland
uninhabitted. We also have Ardna making a descovery of Ireland 140 after the flood
(This is here where things get a little bit confused) but did'nt stay and went
back to Babylon. So it seems we are talking about two descoveries here . one by
Ciocal in 2235 BC and the other one later in 2208 BC. I would need there fore if
that is the case to make an emmendment to my combined industries tables without
having to alter the whole table if I paste the ammended part of the table and
call it "Another Alternative Historyor Genealogy then I can place Ciocal
under date of 2235 BC and Ardna (Nimrod?) in 2208 BC again 140 years after the
flood. Plus also the construction of Scara Brae at 2200 to 2000 BC. What do you
reckon? By the way many thanks for sharing this info with me and sorry to get
back to you so late; but I've been looking for the links pages Dan sent me with
regard to James's take on Atlantice and as Dan says I really need to study it.
Anyway many thanks for what you do forme Darrell. God Bless John

On
1/2/08, Darrell White wrote:

John,

1) Ardna 2208 BC - of the family of Nimrod, not Nimrod, maybe not even a
son.
2) Ciocal 2235 BC (200 years fishing before Patholan) - fishing where?, we do
not know where it was. a) maybe after 2208 BC before he fished in that
area. or b) He fished near Scotland and did not land on Irish soil, thus
giving Ardna that honor. Obviously, the survey team saw it by 2248 BC at
least.
3) birthof Ciocal was just an estimate to show that he had to have born by at
least 2275 BC to be the leader by 2235 BC. If so, he had to be within the
first 4 generations after the flood. which mean the genealogy given is probably
a mistake with someone else later on. But we should watch.

I would not change you table based on this information unless you desire to
assume Ciocal in scotland by about 2235 BC.

AN IMPOSSIBLE TASK?

LP and JXF

"Folk lore and camp fire tales do not a history
make." LP

"But on the other hand, there's no smoke
and tales without a camp fire" JXF

You attempt an impossible task. Lack of accurate historical records means we
shall never know. The Greek history fades into mists around 1100 BC. To develop
a history of nations more westernly and trace them back to Noah is the wildest
of speculation and madness. I have better things to do

... Larry Pierce

These ages are the results of someone's imagination. They exist only in
textbooks and the rarefied air of academic circles. Attached is the intro to
Newton rewritten. You stand a better chance of creating your own genealogy back
to the time of Christ then trying to trace English history back to Noah. After
100-200 years, everything is lost of any value unless it is written down. e.g.
Tell me what you ancestors did from 1850 to 1860. Good luck unless someone wrote
it down.
--
Thank you for everything.

Newton says Gaul, Spain, Germany, Scythia, Sweden, Ireland, Britain did not
have a written history until long after Alexander the Great. e.g. 280 AD or
later. Your efforts to reconstruct any history for more than 100 years before it
was written down is a complete waste of time. It is mere speculation at best. I
looked at Cooper's book and cannot find anything in it to refute what Newton
said about a written history. There is a good reason the records he cites are
ignored by scholars. They are pure speculation. Some Jew wrote a copy of the
book of Enoch in the 16th century. Some twits actually use that forgery to amend
the Bible!! Cooper himself says that their history was in their minds and not
written. Folk lore and camp fire tales do not a history make.
--
Do not waste any more of my time on this rubbish. Your attempts to create a
history before 100 years of written records are absolutely useless.

When did the history of Britian first appear in writing and what was the
language? Please cite your source. Most western European coutries this was
around 500 AD.
--
Thank you for everything.

Larry could you please send me a time line within Yours/Newton's chronology
for the ages or more correctly industries of stone; copper; Bronze and Iron.
Many thanks John

Answer my question first

Larry to answer your question; I would say probably 1000 BC but I'm not sure;
that's why I need your help. John

I would say the language was a celtic language of Phonician origin (if I've
got my facts correct); and come to think of it unless I'm wrong I would cite
Newton as having said that the history of Britain was written sometime after the
birth of Christ. If Eurepean history was written in 500 AD then I'd conjecture
that Britain was the same although I'm notsure, I have no accademic training in
this particular field so can ownly quote what I've seen and read on particular
authors; so if you could send me an industries chart from yours/Newton's
chronology on the ages or industries of stone; copper Bronze and Iron; I'd be
eternally greatfull. John

Bill Cooper places the colonization of Ireland at am2520 or 1484 BC. Does
this not contravine what Newton says Bill also places Brutus the Trogen
colonizing Britain in 1104 BC thus not contravining what Newton has said, If you
cites the chapter on Brutus you will fing that England was empty of habitation
accept for a few Formorian Giants. Does this refute what Newton said? John

Interesting Larry and thanks for the attatchment. I dont know about my
ancestors genealogy as I have'nt traced it. If this is all true then my
assessment of the Neanderthals is that they must have been slaves of the
Phonicians; so the socalled stoneage tools must have been contemporary with the
tools made from Bronze copper and Iron. John

NEMED AND THE 2nd WAVE OF THE FORMORES

(Darrell and John)

Hi Darrell I enjoyed our telephone conversation yesterday evening and will
use your sugested dates of 546 BC to 539 BC Iron A and 330 and 331 BC for
Iron B and Late Bronze Industry Date 722 BC to 585 BC. On your genealogy spread
sheet you have a date of 728 BC. Can you tell me what this date is Darrell? I
have used the short time scale for Nemed at 1736 to 1520 BC (A Rule of 216 yrs).
Can you let me have the time or date for the formorians assuming that this
second wave from North Africa took Ireland from the Nemedians in 1520 BC as I
can't remember how long you said they ruled ubtill. Many thanks Darrell, John

John,

As for the 728 date - please tell me what cell it is in. The only -728 I
found was on the left hand column - which just represents average length between
generations - and is not directly connected to any people.

Using the four masters, with 1736 BC to 1520 BC, they specify that Ireland was a
wasteland for 200 years before the firbolgs who occupied it 37 years. 200
years being a round number, I will use the Annals of Clonmacnoise's date for the
occupation of the firbolgs as 37 years from 1304 BC to 1267 BC. From 1520
BC to 1304 BC it was a waste (4 Masters) or occuppied by Nemeds (Annals).
The Twathy De Dannan's took it in 1267 BC and held it till Miles sons took it.

Darrell

Hi Darrell yes I found the 728 BC date in the left hand column of the
genealogy table somewhere near the middle of the spreadsheet. However I'll use
your recomended date of 722 for late Bronze industry in England to 585 BC and
546 to 539 BC (Iron A indays of Morindus King of Britain and 330 to 300 BC for
Iron B), Darrell if Nemed ruled from 1736 to 1520 BC then when did the
formorians take Ireland from Nemed assuming Ireland was a waste land? John

Hi John,

Looks like it has been 10 days since I looked at my email. Will try to
read your stuff and catch up in two or three days from now - I am swamped with
outside work.

You had a good question. In the 4 masters were they have Ireland a
wasteland after the ice age meltdown, a battle occures abour 1520 BC, but none
just prior to firbolgs occupation. In the Annals of Clonmacnoise the
battle (Conaing Tower - in Keating) occurred 50 years before the firbolgs
occupied Ireland 1354 BC - which posses the question why 50 years before
occupation?

In Keating, 2 different versions, one version speaks of African Formorian's
fleeing (which sounds like 1480 to 1451 BC). The other version speaks of 3
Battles: Sliabh Badhiad, Ross Fraochain, and Murbholgin Dalriada happening about
that time. Those battles may have been the battle mentioned in the 4
masters.

The Book of Invasions also specifies 440 years from Gaedel and Scota to Spain to
the arrival of the sons of Mil. From memory I place that at about 1044 BC +or-
10 years.

It looks like I will need to resolve the 25 to 27 year descripancy(sp) in Irish
history sometime in the next few months, but it is starting to look like a 27
year shift (lowering the dates) will be needed. 1520 BC minus 27 = 1493
BC. Since Keating speak of Formorians fleeing and also of 3 battles, it
seems the 1520 BC will probably need to be adjust to match the time after the
Exodus, but does that fit with the arrival of Gaedel and Scota?

more latter

Darrell

On 8/28/08, john hext-fremlin wrote:
Hi Darrell many thanks for your email. Looks like my guess was pretty close
judjing from thr text down below and the expodition of Hiber Scott with his
claim for his tribe who came 400 yrs later as you say most probably occurred
around 1455/45 BC give or take a few years. There are some texts I've seen
actually have the firbolgue and formores fight eachother to a draw and then rule
Ireland jointly; but how true thyat is I would'nt like to hazard a guess but
again I'd sugest in conclusion "no smoke without a fire". John

Darrell your 1480 BC estimate for Gaedel and Scotta is a very good match for
the old Industries chart; however as you say not enough eb1 implements and
weopens for transition to eb1 untill 1304 BC. What we need to do right now is to
fathom out the time from Tuatha de Dannaan to Mil which I
worked out as 197+15=212 yrs with in the date range of 1055 to 1015 BC in
Solomans day. John

Hi again Darrell: The Combined Industries charts sugest that 1480 BC might be
about right for Hiber Scot's claim to Ireland if his tribe came 440 years later
woulf thereofre figure with the slightly higher dates range for 1480. Now if the
Formores fought these battles say 1480 to 1520 BC; I would like to conjecture
that this would probably fit in with the time of Soloman when he chased the
caananites out of Caanan and may well match up with the Formorians fleeing about
1480 BC plus the remnant of Nemeds after the Ice age melt down thus 1491 BC; so
yes Iwould aggree with you that these battles were fought with the Nemeds (1520
BC - 1480 BC= 40 yrs) for a period of 40 yrs. Conclusion the formores flee
Ireland and Hiber Scott makes his claim in 1480 BC by simple deduction. John

Hi John,

I am using a quota system for writing my paper. This weekend, if I meet my
quota, I will research Ireland.

Yet interesting concept you suggested. If a remnant of the Nemeds
remained, Hiber Scott may have been involved. Hiber would not have a just
claim unless 1) It was already a wasteland or 2) unless he subdued the
inhabitence of Ireland (remaining Nemeds).

You said "the firbolgue and formores fight eachother to a draw and then
rule Ireland jointly;"
what if they did, but it left Ireland essencially a wasteland which Hiber Scott
could claim in the 1477 BC time frame. 1477 BC is an arbitrary number -
but important on my chart of durations.

Darrell

Firbolgue to Tuatha de Dannan 30 yrs

(Darrell and John)

Darrell you mentioned to me on the telephone that the firbolgues were in Ireland
for 30 yrs and if the next coloney were the Tuatha de Daanans the 1304 BC (Firbolgues)
- 30 yrs = 1294 BC for the Tuatha de Daanans does'nt it on your new chronology
whereas my combined industries chart gives 1252 BC on your advise. John

John,

The different source fairly well agree on 37 years for the firbolgues.
1304 to 1267 BC.

I do not remember the 1252 BC date - so I can't say for sure. However, I
may have been working backwards. If firbolgues for 197 years and if Mile's
sons arrived 1055 then the backwards projection would be 1252 BC. If 1045
for miles son's, then 1242 BC. Thus about 25 year mismatch must be taken
account off. I do not have the answer yet. But when I check on the
27 year note on my chart at that point it may resolve it.

I numbers I gave you just reflect the ancient sources. But I must resolve
a 25 year difference some day for those sources to match the correct time for
Mile's sons arrival.

Darrell

Hi Darrell; I'll go with your 1304 to 1267 BC for Firbolgues to tuatha de
danaans. By the way I've used1445BC for Hymec Scott laying claim to Ireland as a
provisional date. John

Neolithic Culture in Ireland

It has very little to do with that.

I got some interesting dates that I could not fined
elsewhere.

But Flood date is 31 years off.So that leave questions.

He has Hercules in 1700 BC fighting the Giants.I think it is a confusion on his part - a confusion of Hercules - Egypt
vs Hercules -Libya, since he has Osiris in 1700 BC, which nothing I have seen
can justify.

I'll attach my text version in openoffice format so you
can see my notes.

Darrell

> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 14:25:34 +0000

- Hide quoted text -

> Subject: Re: Ireland on Cwiki

> From: johnhextfremlin@googlemail.com

> To: white_darrell@hotmail.com

>

> Hi Darrell this looks very interesting. I was just
thinking about this

> book the other day. Would Noah's Travels into
Europe I sugest have any

> thing to do with the World Survey Teams surveying
Europe China &c of